Hands up. Do you have friends who carefully chose unique baby names only to find that their choice turned up on the Most Popular Baby Names list? In some households this can happen more than once, despite the parents’ best efforts. Isn’t it fascinating how a couple can choose a name because they like it, or it’s a family name, and it turns out to be a popular name when the child enters school. Olivia the cartoon pig had to contend with the shocking news that there will be a second Olivia in her class. Then there are the names that don’t appear on the top 100 – think Emmett and Wesley – until, without warning, they appear in the hot and rising name category.
It’s a funny business – choosing a baby name – but it’s also lots of fun. Of course there’s also the cross-over possibilities for when you search names to use for your pet. It’s always useful to have a list of favourite names on hand.
Girls: Alice, Charlotte, Frances, Hazel, Leonie, Penelope, Ruby and Wren. Also popular: Fleur, Iris, Ivy, Juniper, Magnolia, Hazel, Ruby and Scarlet
Boys: Elliot, James, Kingston, Silas and Walter. Also popular: Gideon, Isaac, James, Jude, Hezekiah.
Nameberry.com hot names on the rise. Girls: Blythe, Estelle, Aria, Ivy and Adelle Boys: Emmett, Everett, Weston, Wesley, West, Grayson, Gray, Cyrus and Cato
It is a story that pulled ahead of the pack in the bleary hours of early morning news. Hilary Rosen, a consultant to the Democrats and CNN commentator, has called out Mitt Romney and his wife for comments they have made about women and the economy. While speaking with Anderson Cooper on CNN, Rosen suggested that Romney hasn’t “worked a day in her life”. In the Twitterverse and blogosphere all buttons pointing to mothers, their participation in the workforce and access to affordable childcare are fully engaged. Stay-at-home-dads have also been pulled into the conversation.
Ann Romney responded by sharing her opinion about Stay-at-Home Moms on her new (and verified) Twitter account:
I made a choice to stay home and raise five boys. Believe me, it was hard work.
Romney explained that her “career choice was to be a mother and [she thinks] all of us need to know that we need to respect choices that women make.” Hilary Rosen also shared her response to Romney on Twitter:
@AnnDRomney I am raising children too. But most young American women HAVE to BOTH earn a living AND raise children. You know that don’t u? — Hilary Rosen (@hilaryr) April 12, 2012
In a discussion with Anderson Cooper on CNN, Rosen agreed with the Romney’s belief that women are more focussed on economic issues related to their families than they are on other topics. Similarly, Canadian election-related research shows that women are most attuned to political messages that focus on social welfare and issues that affect the economic reality of their family life.
In OECD assessments, the United States and Canada provide some of the poorest early childhood education and care offerings. Parental leave rights in the United States are a fraction of the 12 months provided in Canada. On this topic, feminist author Jessica Valenti joined the conversation on Twitter:
Since @mittromney & @AnnDRomney value women’s domestic work so much, when will they discuss their plan for national paid parental leave?
The developing story related to this exchange highlights the divide between Republican and Democrat priorities that is also seen in Canada. The Conservative Party of Canada (CPC) prefers to provide Canadian families with cash in hand that they can use to either pay for daycare or raise children at home. Unfortunately the amount provided barely makes a dent in the costs that families in British Columbia encounter, for example, when they need to use daycare. British Columbians and Canadians in other provinces (excluding Quebec) cannot find daycare even if they CAN afford the fees. Wait-lists for high quality programmes can be three years long. (Two years too long for mothers in the workforce.) In contrast to the priorities of the CPC, the NDP, Green Patry and Liberal Party of Canada political parties are focussed on developing a national early childhood education and care programme. Provisions for parental leave in the United States are less than half of what is provided in Canada. Women cobble together a few weeks leave by adding in vacation time as well. For most women, financial needs dictate that they will return to work. “The United States of America, for example, is the only OECD country without a national paid parental leave policy, although some states do provide leave payments. Available parental leave is short (12 weeks), and only covers some employees (those in companies with 50+ workers). While making changes will involve a cost to employers, there will be benefits not only to child well-being but also the labour market, as evidence suggests that when US mothers take their full leave entitlement, they are more likely to return to work than mothers who do not.” (OECD, Better Life Index) Of 173 countries surveyed, the United States of America, Lesotho, Liberia, Papua New Guinea and Swaziland are the only countries were there is no national law requiring paid time off for new parents. Hilary Rosen also suggested that Ann Romney has not “dealt with the kinds of economic issues that a majority of women in [the United States] are facing in terms of how do [they] feed [their] kids? How do [they] send them to school and why do [they] worry about their future?” Rosen’s comments speak more to a critique of an affluent, privileged woman than a woman who is the average stay-at-home mom. Most stay-at-home moms in the United States live on modest one household incomes – or income assistance – and have financial concerns similar to those of mothers in the workforce.
Why is it controversial to say that incredibly rich, elite Ann Romney prolly doesnt understand the economic concerns of most American women? — Jessica Valenti (@JessicaValenti) April 12, 2012
The issues raised by the Romneys, Hilary Rosen and their supporters bring forward many questions:
Why do women choose to stay at home with their children?
Are some mothers at home full-time due to specific lifestyle choices such as religion, intellectual beliefs, homesteading or living off the grid, for example?
Are some women’s choices related to the availability, cost and/or quality of childcare?
Is the choice to stay at home with one’s children an economic luxury in the United States and Canada? Would some parents like to stay at home with the children, but can’t afford to do so?
Are some women staying at home when they would rather, if they could, be in the workforce? (See similar issue in the UK.)
What contributions do stay-at-home-mothers make to the quality of life of their families and, in an unpaid capacity, through their contributions to society?
Are some women, as Facebook executive Sheryl Sandberg repeatedly points out, choosing to mentally check out and “leave before their leave” when they could and should be planning a return to work, post pregnancy? Are women who stay at home with their children avoiding or escaping from jobs that are not, as Sandberg suggests, “compelling”?
For women who do want to be in the workforce, what quality of childcare will they encounter in their communities? Are the programmes that are provided stimulating and nurturing for children?
What choices do single mothers – especially those with limited or no extra financial support – have when it comes to raising their children, working and childcare?
How do the provisions for high quality and accessible childcare in states and provinces compare to those in countries such as Finland and Sweden?
How can we encourage the development of government policies that support both women in the workforce and women who choose to stay at home full or part time with their children?
How can we encourage respectful dialogue about the diverse life and career choices that women make rather than focusing on ideas promoted by partisan politics?
How do members of the media keep a spotlight on the needs of children and families in their communities and countries?
Do members of the media focus on the key topics or are they distracted by trending, and not necessarily typical topics such as Tiger Moms?
How do politicians stay abreast of the challenges that their constituents are facing?
Are politicians in the United States and Canada following public discourse about these topics in the media – including their own media? (Prime Minister Stephen Harper, for example, admits that he does not follow the Canadian news.)
How are individual citizens sharing information about their experiences in public spaces such as social media?
The issues this media moment raises are important topics that will not necessarily be addressed adequately during presidential and federal election campaigns. Members of the media will pick up the story today and drop it again the day after tomorrow. It is left to women and their partners to speak up and share their stories on their websites, blogs, Twitter accounts, Facebook pages and in their personal and professional conversations.
What is your story? Why did you decide to stay at home full-time with your children, or work full or part time? What quality of childcare have you accessed? Was it difficult to secure a space? What are your thoughts about the cost, availability and quality of childcare programmes? If you could make changes, would you? How have your decisions related to childcare affected your career path, promotion opportunities and pension?
We’d love to hear from you so don’t be shy! You can comment about this posting using the comment function below or visit us at our Facebook page.
Sh*t mums say? Hmnn. Surely on your journey as a mum you have heard your fair share of statements that could create awkward moments. In fact some people refer to some of these topics as the basis for Mommy Wars.
Sh*t Vancouver moms say was the topic of a recent comment string on Facebook. Thanks VancouverMom.ca! At last count there were 50 people who had left comments. Clearly this is a topic that resonates.
Here are some examples of SMS – or more precisely what some talk about that could be the subject of a parody about mums about town:
* shopping for organic food and items, exclusively
* shopping at the right types of stores where aforementioned organically correct items are sold
* only using the best ingredients. No sandwich meats. No foods from the middle of the store
* not using plastic bottles, even if they are BPA free
* buying precisely the right type of baby soother. Yes that BPA thing again.
* whether or not to use a soother
* the importance of wearing a baby, co-sleeping, breastfeeding for the right period of time and only using cloth diapers
* the need to hire tutors for very young children before they enter Kindergarten
* the need to attend a number of popular baby and toddler programmes such as mum and baby exercise, gymnastics, art, music, literacy, early childhood and sports classes
* comparing stay at home mums to mums who work outside the home
* comparing mums who have extra help, such as nannies and housekeepers, to mums that don’t
* the need to sign up early for programmes such as swim class or the right pre-school
* attending the right pre-school or school
* using a private/independent school versus a public school
* crossing borders (crossing the city) to attend another public school
* bench marks that your child has mastered. Think eating, talking, walking, crawling, toilet training andreading independently ,for example. “What do you mean you’re taking a relaxed approach to toilet training? Your children are 2 1/2!”
* going on holidays with your children. “What? You haven’t travelled in years?”
* I need my Girls Night Out and luncheons alone with my girlfriends. “What? You don’t go out on your own?”
* having the right type of dentist. “What? Your children go to a regular dentist?”
* Childcare/Nannies/Babysitters “What? You don’t have one?”
* the need to drive around to many places every day in your car, coffee mug in hand. “What? You don’t drink coffee? You don’t live in your car half the time? You don’t have a second car? You don’t have a car Monday to Friday AND you don’t have bus service during the day?!”
* the need to have the right educational toys and gear
* the need to cook all baby food/food from scratch
* why you waited to have children. “You’re over 35, aren’t you? Left it a bit late didn’t you? Why did you wait? What? You mean you didn’t wait on purpose? But you’re 40!”
* are you the nanny?
* did you adopt your children from China?
* do twins run in your family? [Let's talk about how you procreated.]
* not needing second hand clothes/pass offs when offered
* having the right safety devices or not having enough of them
Who could argue that it is bad to buy organic food or breastfeed a child? Unfortunately some mums shrink into their allotted seat at mums and babies groups when they feel they have somehow been deficient compared to the prevailing opinion or habits of a group. That’s when a situation can go from awkward to just plain uncomfortable.
” No. I am not a part-time mum because I had a nanny help me during the first year of my twins’ lives.” [I don't think I want to attend this mums and babies group anymore.]
Just in case you think these conversation starters are exclusive to mums, we could just as easily talk about Sh*t Dads say. After all, just the other day one dad said to another “WHAT. Seriously, buddy? You don’t know about that indoor playground?”.
[Confused look ensued.]
Uh. No. He didn’t.
It would a treat to hear from you so don’t be shy! You can comment about this posting using the comment function below or visit the BCFamily.ca Facebook page.
A day does not go by when a Stay at Home or Working Out of the Home mother does not find a news story telling her what she is doing, not doing and feeling. We live in an era when findings from studies – well designed or not – are easily disseminated by way of social media links, online media outlets or attention-grabbing headlines on the national news. This type of information even shows up on websites like this one!
The latest research about mothers and depression was presented this week by Katrina Leupp, graduate student from the University of Washington, at an American Sociological Association conference in Nevada. Leupp accessed a National Longtitudinal Survey run by the US. Department of Labor that included data from a survey of 1,600 married women carried out in 2006. At the time the average age of the women was 40. These same women were interviewed previously when they were between age 22 and 30 about their attitudes towards being a working mother. Leupp concluded that the women who were keenest to engage in careers while being parents were more likely to suffer from depression than women who were initially against the idea of trying to balance both roles. Or to put it another way, the keen women initially responded that the combination of a career and parenthood could be done with relative ease.
A second finding was that women who are stay at home mums, and who often cannot enter the workforce due to circumstances beyond their control, are more likely to experience depression than mums who work outside of the home. Many of the news articles reporting the findings are highlighting the idea, to use their wording, that super moms, with high flying careers, need to chill. You can hear the gnashing teeth of hard working women everywhere who are busy working outside of the home and raising children.
In media interviews Leupp repeatedly states that working is beneficial for a woman’s health; however, does it follow that staying out of the workforce is bad for women’s health? Nobody would suggest that there aren’t women who are happy to be at home full time caring for their children. While many of these women would be able to point to daily challenges that they experience, many would also argue that their mental health is as good as the average mother who works outside of the home. Are all women who are forced to exit the workforce due to economic or other circumstances likely to suffer in terms of their health? Here in Canada Stephen Harper’s Conservative Party colleagues favour the stay at home option. The Federal government currently provides Canadian parents with modest payments that can be used as parents see fit. This is a soft version of the “everyone can look after themselves” attitudes you find in the United States and increasingly in Great Britain. One could argue that it is an approach that would be more favourable to conservative (with a small c) Canadian families who believe that the mother should stay at home with their children in the early years.
Conversely, in many western European OECD countries governments have promoted social policies, such as fully funded and accessible childcare for pre-toddlers and older, that support the re-entry of mothers into the workforce. The underlying strategy was to increase female participation in the workforce in order to strengthen their economies. Here in Canada the question of mothers (or a stay at home father) entering the workforce and the funding of Early Childhood Education & Care (ECEC) centres is never discussed in these terms. In Scandinavia, where social policy related to women and children is advanced compared to North American standards, a reporter would be hard pressed to find a mother who isn’t working outside the home.
The current approach to ECE&C funding by the Federal and Provincial governments is an alternative to the Federal and Provincial funding of accessible and affordable ECEC facilities. In cities such as Ottawa, the New Democrat Party are reporting that 9,000 families (you read that right) are on wait lists for licensed care facilities. The situation in Vancouver is equally as bleak. It is not unusual to meet a parent who will tell you that they were on a licensed child care facility wait list for three years before a space opened up. For two years following maternity leave, the parents “made do” with less than adequate alternatives.
Meanwhile many women in more senior positions, such as older mums over 30, are returning to their jobs before their maternity leaves are over in order to protect their jobs. A long absence from a management position, for example, greatly reduces a woman’s influence in an office, in a political sense; can affect future work allocation and participation in ongoing projects; and, can directly or indirectly lead to changes in a job profile or even dismissal while on maternity leave. (See: Working to Live ) Accommodations for all of these possible outcomes are usually included in the administrative policies of larger organizations. As one female author online asked, “who’s more likely to be dismissed during an office reshuffle? The man who gave a PowerPoint presentation last week or the woman who’s been off for months on maternity leave?”
How does these considerations relate to a study about mothers and depression? In North America we receive failing grades from international organizations such as the OECD in the area of ECE&C. Privately we value our children, but collectively we have been unable to decide how we want to support parents and caregivers, as they in turn care for children. We debate about whether children should be cared for by the parent or a licensed care giver. We debate about how should pay for these services. We debate about what types of programme should be in place and who should pay for these programmes. Some might argue that – quite frankly – we’re hardly debating about these topics at all. They arise every four years during election time, and disapear again. Meanwhile women – young and older mothers – are struggling to reconcile their role as parent with their role as employee without the support of strong policies in the workforce and the understanding of Canadians in general. Leupp concludes that, at least in the United States, for many women these struggles include depression.
In reference to the University of Washington study, Leupp points out that there are women at home with their children who cannot fully engage in the workforce in the United States where, despite the shorter maternity leaves, working conditions are similar to those in Canada. Why is that? Is there no available childcare? Is childcare too unaffordable? Are the terms of her working life so restrictive that it became too difficult to work?
Leupp also mentions a finding that has been highlighted in other research studies. Women – whether or not they work outside of the home – still complete the majority of the housework in the home. In Canada that rate is well over 50%. How does this rate compare to other countries? As the author suggests, should women simply accept this reality, or can we, in our society, encourage new attitudes towards sharing the workload on the home front? Leupp also touches on the topic of stay at home fathers. Increasingly fathers in Canada are taking advantage of paternity leave or are considering their options when it comes to staying at home with their children. In Scandinavia there are strong examples of how men can contribute to the full time care of children, thereby allowing mothers to protect their careers as well. (See: Fatherhood in Sweden )
A focus of Leupp’s study centres on womens’ expectations. Her findings suggest more questions. Is it realistic for a young woman to expect that a career and parenthood should go together seemlessly? How do the attitudes of a Generation X parent compare to those of younger women today who were raised in slightly different family circumstances? How do the depictions in the media of harried, super multi tasking, hovering, Tiger mums influence a woman’s ability to define what she wants and can expect for her own parenting journey?
Tomorrow, or the next day, another study will be released with more information about motherhood and parenting. Here in British Columbia and in Canada the challenge for mothers and parents everywhere is to engage in increased and louder discussions about their experiences and needs. Many questions need to be asked. What types of work/childcare arrangements are working for them? What isn’t working? What types of changes help them? How much does it cost parents to pay for childcare? How much does it cost them to live in the Lower Mainland or other parts of British Columbia and Canada? How much are their mortgage payments and what is their cost of living compared to their income? How long is their commute? What type of commute do they have? What type of transit options can parents access? What type 0f childcare facility/provider are they using? What type of childcare programme does their child experience in this center? How would they assess the quality of care there? What are the professional qualificiations of their childcare provider? What did she/he have to study in order to achieve these qualifications? How supportive are their employers and colleagues regarding the daily challenges they face as a parent? Do some of their colleagues resent that they might use sick time to support their sick child or that they might arrive late or leave early in order to support their child’s needs? Does their office allow for some work-at-home time? Did the mother return to work before her maternity leave was finished? Does she feel that her position at work was compromized because of her absence from work? Did she feel that she needed to stay in touch with the office and with the progression of work and ongoing projects at the office while on maternity leave in order to protect her position? If her position was cut during maternity leave, why does she think that happened? Why do Stay at Home Mums prefer to be a stay at home parent? As a SAHM, what are the rewards and challenges of her role? What kind of support networks and resources do they have in their community for their children and for themselves? What kind of services can she access that are free or affordable? Does she feel isolated from or a part of an adult world where most people work outside of the home? Does she feel that people respect her choice to be a SAHM beyond maternity leave? Do people still recognize her other academic and professional qualifications in conversations and interactions? Would she be able to find part-time care should she take on a part-time job or work from home?
These are some of the many questions and topics that women can and do discuss privately, at work, online and in the media. With the advancements in technology and new tools coming out monthly in the realm of Social Media, women in urban and rural British Columbia can use creative methods to get their message out. Studies can help to raise further questions but the women who are directly involved need to be at the centre of the conversations and the related development of social policies by Federal and Provincial governments.
We’d love to hear from you so don’t be shy! You can comment about this posting using the comment function below or visit us at our Facebook page.
Casual conversation. General enquiries. Questions about a child’s development can be part of conversation starters or a not so subtle expression of an underlying and grave concern. When this type of conversation starts, the parents are happy to talk about theit child. A Stay-at-Home Mum, for example, spends a good part of her week with her child and knows how he or she has reached developmental milestones. Where these conversations can take a turn is when the friend, colleague, family member or stranger-at-large starts to make comparisons between the child in question and a child he or she knows. “My friend’s son is the same age and can already say three word sentences.” “I remember when my daughter’s girl was this age. She could say all of the colour names and could count to ten. How many words did you say your child knows?”
It is hard to understand the motivation behind these statements and questions. Is it concern? Is it concern pressed forward to elicit action? Does the concerned conversation partner really want to say “In other words, I’m asking you about your child and making comparisons so that you can see that there is something wrong with your child and seek medical attention”.
For the sake of simplicity, let’s call these conversation partners 19th century Armchair Critics. NACs for short. After all, the standards for child development that they quote do not appear to match the advise of any child development expert writing in modern times. NACs believe that there is a very tight window within which young children develop a skill. They also believe that if a child develops a skill before that time period, he is intellectually gifted. Similarly if his skill development is delayed there is a problem. Indeed there is the potential that this child might grow up to be intellectually inferior to the aforementioned gifted child.
The fun doesn’t stop there.
The NAC also believes that someone could be at fault. Enter the mother or primary care giver. “Little 2-year old Ethan’s nanny has taught him how to count to 20 in Spanish and read flashcards.” Pregnant pause. “So what have you been doing with YOUR child, Mum?” is the next logical question, but it isn’t vocalized.
Oh for the love of education. When will it stop? This obsession with comparing children and how they are reaching their developmental milestones has to end. It has been allowed to fester for the last few decades and, quite frankly, parents of young children everywhere are finding the tune to be beyond boring.
There are children in our midst who are struggling to learn how to speak, for example. In fact they may be experiencing a significant delay. They may be seeing a speech therapist. They might have been flagged to be at risk of having an autism spectrum disorder. They may already have a confirmed condition which affects their ability to form sounds using the muscles in their mouth, for example. They may never be able to speak as eloquently as the NAC who is currently drilling the child’s parents about this three year old’s speech development.
While most children with delayed speech and language development, for example, do not fall into this category, some may. Suggesting that a child who is not likely to experience long term delays is “at risk” shows a lack of sensitivity to the needs of children and their families who truly are coping with the likelihood of long term challenges. NACs everywhere need to leave it to medical practitioners in British Columbia, working with primary caregivers, to determine how progress is being made and whether or not there is a problem. Moreover, if a child does show challenges reaching a developmental milestone, she is not deficient compared to the children held up as examples for comparison. We all have our challenges and issues with which we struggle. Although admittedly some are more challenging than others. Yes we can compare one child’s textbook perfect development to the rate of progress of a child who seems to have less developed skills. This assessment is not based on medical fact, but rather is grounded more in our own understanding of what should be happening. Or we can allow the children in our lives the space to develop at their own pace, in their own way, to the best of their abilities. We can provide these children with as much support as we can possibly give them. Support that is grounded in a positive attitude and outlook, and a lack of judgment.
For some time now I have had a feeling of amazement every time I encounter a woman who has had two or more children within the span of a few years. What an accomplishment! What an effort! What an undertaking! What a blessing!
I first had this feeling when I was still a barely out of my teenage years and quite unaware of what pregnancy entailed. When I was 15, I babysat a newborn baby while I lived in Tokyo as an international student. For two years I looked after her while her parents attended diplomatic events or her mum went off to various functions. The family moved away and I never met up with them again. By the time the girl was six years old, she had two younger sisters. I was amazed.
Of course I still come across these types of stories. You know the ones. “…and then there were three!” Two years ago I became a mother to twins and had my own opportunity to make big changes on the home front. As one can imagine, that was quite an undertaking too. I would like to say that I loved being pregnant and that it was a blissful experience. Of course I was very pleased and felt blessed and there were special moments, such as the times when the babies would move. When I look back on that time period, however, I recall a nine month period of holding my breath, hoping and praying for the best, trying not to get too stressed and generally taking things one day at a time. Every month that we moved closer to the 30 week mark, the easier my breathing became. For the last six months I was concerned about tightening sensations and for the last four months I was on bed rest. Every two days a nurse would come by to check on the babies’ progress. I should not forget to mention that we were in the middle of a heat wave that summer and I lived in front of the water cooler. I also recall that I wasn’t able to go on a Mexican holiday at five months or walk around in high heels at eight months. I wasn’t working until two weeks before the delivery. Indeed I wasn’t really walking that much. To this day when I see very pregnant women bounding about like Ivanka Trump, playing golf while pregnant and working on the baby’s due date, I can’t help but make comparisons to my own experience.
Thanks to the care of my husband, family members and numerous medical practitioners, my husband, children and I came through the experience. I am also thankful to the director in my division at work who sent me home on sick leave four months before the children were born. If he hadn’t taken this step I fear what would have happened.
As your children get older and become toddlers, it is easy to look at other babies and pregnant women and feel nostalgic about pregnancy. It seems that many a mother has become wistful about the baby stage when her first born leaves the baby years behind. You sometimes hear stories about parents feeling like “they are not done yet”, or they want to have one more child before the wife turns 40. There must be something deeply anthropological about these emotions and thought processes. Clearly this type of yearning helps to ensure the continuation of the human population.
In our home the joy of the twins’ birth was followed by surgery for pyloric stenosis for one twin and other concerns for a possible health condition for the second twin that doesn’t appear to have come about after all. During the first few months we were in out out of doctors’ appointments regularly. We visited most of the major divisions at the BC Children’s Hospital and had Infant Development Programme professionals visiting us at home. During that time I also had the opportunity to see babies in the hospital who had concerns even more serious than those of my children.
The birth of twins is a remarkable process. I still recall the happy exclamations in the surgery room when the medical staff on hand (about a dozen of them) were told that twins were waiting to be born. I still enjoy looking at photos of the OB, GP and pediatrician who were all in the room overseeing the birth. (The Gold Star team, as I call them.) Here at BC Family we have been so blessed to have the support of doctors and special service providers for our children. The progression of our story has been quite different from those of most people I see and we have, indeed, been very busy. Yet when I see women having a baby not long after her first baby (or second) has left the baby months behind, I am even more amazed because I now understand what pregnancy and raising more than one young child entails. I also know that some women have difficulty getting pregnant for the first time or after their first child was born. Multiple pregnancies in a short period of time are nothing short of a blessing AND a miracle. Most people might think this is a normal state of affairs that has been happening for centuries. I say “congratulations and what an accomplishmnent!”
A week does not go by when we are not hearing stories about one Hollywood star or another having a child after 40. Often the actor is having her first or second child. Who doesn’t love a story about babies? Nowadays people are equally fascinated with the details about how older moms are fulfilling their dream to become a mother. Members of the media are also keen to share every detail about fertility treatments in Hollywood. In a recent interview with Celine Dion one journalist went so far as to ask Celine how many embryos she had left. Not surprisingly, Celine did not share details about this very personal information.
Here in British Columbia women in their late 30s and early 40s face many challenges and obstacles if they hope to start a family. One of the most common reactions from contemporaries is the question “why did you wait so long?”. A further assessment might include the conclusion that a woman focussed on her career too much, was too picky about finding a husband or simply waited too long. This is the uncomfortable environment in which women starting a family beyond 35 live.
The statistics and news about fertility treatments for those who are struggling to start a family can be confusing. Even though Hollywood actors are having babies using IVF, some reports present depressing statistics about success rates for women close to 40 and beyond. Additionally there is no shortage of heart breaking stories about what can go wrong on the fertility journey. It can also seem formidable to consider adoption options. The adoption process in Canada can be expensive, slow and uncertain. Adoptions overseas have become more difficult and come with their own challenges.
Considering these challenges, it is heart warming to read about Sharon Simon, who has shared her story about becoming a mother after 40 on the website Flowerpower.com . Simons’ difficult foray into the world of IVF ended in heartbreak; however, she was able to successfully adopt two children from Russia.
If you are a mother over 40 or if you are seeking more information about adoption, do check out both the Flowerpower.com site published by Angel La Liberte and Simons’ site called momatlast.com,where you can find information about adoption and related stories.
I have many [regrets]. I wish I hadn’t been so harsh. I wish I hadn’t lost my temper so much. I wish I’d paid more attention earlier to the individual personalities of my daughters. Maybe given them a little more choice. If I’d had to do it all over again, I would basically do the same thing with some adjustments. Looking at my daughters now, I am incredibly proud of them. It’s not just that they’re good students. It’s that they’re really kind, generous, confident, happy girls with lots of friends and huge personalities. They’re always putting me in my place. They’re the opposite of robots. (Amy Chua, Author, Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother in a Globe and Mail interview.)
It’s all about priorities. At least this is the impression you might receive after reading Yale Law Professor Amy Chua’s confessions about her parenting style. In a recently released book, Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother, Chua talks about the habits and perspectives of Chinese parents and her experiences living in a Eurasian household. Since Ms. Chua is a Chinese-American who was raised in the United States, we have to understand the term “Chinese parents” loosely. She could be talking about parents in China, recent immigrants to North America, or first or second generation Chinese-North Americans who favour the parenting ideology found in the typical Chinese families.
In a recent article in the Wall Street Journal, Ms. Chua explains that she has taken a hands-on and in your face approach to raising her children. One really cannot get the full flavor of the author’s perspective without reading her new book; however, it does seem that she is describing her approach with a touch of satire and full on conviction. She also contrasts her own approach with values and perspectives favoured by “western parents”. Presumably this term refers to anyone who lives in the United States,is not a Chinese parent or does not identify as a recent immigrant. A little bit of controversy never hurts an author when her book is being launched. It’s no surprise then that the article sports an eye popping title. Why Chinese Mothers are Superior. Can a regimen of no playdates, no TV, no computer games and hours of music practice create happy kids? An what happens when they fight back? Wowsers. That’s a title guaranteed to attract a few “click throughs”. The author has since stated that she did not choose the title for this article. If she could have chosen a tamer and less attention grabbing title ,would she have approved a more conservative option?
The reader learns that in the pre-teen years Ms. Chua’s children were not permitted the following*:
• attending a sleepover
• having a playdate
• being in a school play
• complaining about not being in a school play
• watching TV or playing computer games
• choosing their own extracurricular activities
• getting any grade less than an A
• not being the No. 1 student in every subject except gym and drama
• playing any instrument other than the piano or violin
• not playing the piano or violin.
* The author admits that as the girls entered their teens one of her daughters rebelled and she had to change her approach. They are allowed sleep overs now and go to concerts.
It seems that common childhood social activities were seen as distractions and time wasters. The author also set her priorities about what the children should be doing and achieving: an A in all academic subjects and mastery of two instruments. Most parents will be shocked by this list. They will be even more alarmed when they read that the author routinely berated her children and even called her daughter garbage on one occasion. Apparently Chua was treated the same way by her parents and claims that this is not an uncommon practice in Chinese households. She further argues that over the top compliments and praise that are not a realistic assessment of the child’s abilities can sometimes make a child feel more diminished than if he or she had received harsh critiques. In contrast, she explains that if the child excels in her chosen subjects and hobbies, much praise is lavished on the child in private. Additionally, the child is more prepared for the harsh environment of the world at large.
Even though Chua’s book is a memoir, her ideas raise questions about whether her own approach is reasonable and worthy of replication in other households.
- What kind of world would we live in if all parents treated their children this way? Would we be happier? Would we be more successful and grateful? Would we be more self-fulfilled?
- Would most children excel in school if parents took the approach of Ms. Chua?
- Do children in these types of households grow up to appreciate or resent their parents for micro-programming and directing their lives?
- How do these children learn to develop their own initiatives, take chances and feel a sense of accomplishment independent of the viewpoints of others?
- What would happen to children who have learning difficulties or are interested in non-academic subjects?
- Ms. Chua and her children are female. Do boys respond equally as well to harsh words from parents?
- What happens if the child is particularly sensitive?
- The author called her daughter an “uncultured savage” for not trying caviar in Russia. The daughter called her mother selfish and terrible and added that she hated her and the violin. The author concludes that she would not change how she raised her daughters, but would make a few adjustments including less anger outbursts, respecting her daughters individual personalities and providing a bit more choice. Could she implement these changes and maintain the approach that she took in the early, intensive learning years? Would just a few changes have avoided this repressed outburst from her daughter?
- Should a parent force a child to practice repetitively for hours on end? Shouldn’t the child have an internal drive and motivation to want to continue to learn a skill?
- Are there other teaching methods that could have helped the author’s girls master a skill (eg a piano song) rather than the harsh approach mentioned in the article?
- Are “western parents” really as soft and lenient as the author believes? How does the author account for widely reported cases of helicopter parenting? Very few parents want to admit that they are “helicopter parents”. Couldn’t it be argued that the latter have a similar approach to parenting? They monitor their child’s progress carefully. They love their children and want them to achieve their full potential. They believe in their children’s abilities and carefully monitor their weekly activities.
- Is there another way that the author could accept that is somewhere between too lenient and the methods mentioned by the author?
- Do children really need to study and practice every waking moment outside of school hours in order to excel? Were three hours of music practice per day and double sessions on weekends necessary?
- Why couldn’t the author let her children attend a sleep over play date from time to time when they were young? Was the girls’ week so tightly scheduled?
- How did this non participation in common childhood social opportunities affect the social development of the author’s daughters?
- Couldn’t it be argued that children need to develop pride in their work on their own rather than relying on praise lavished by adults? What do psychologist know about how children develop a sense of satisfaction in their own efforts? Is a feeling of pride and self satisfaction connected to internal or external input? Why do children feel motivated to pursue an interest or make an effort?
- How do new generations of Chinese-North American parents combine traditional beliefs about child rearing with new perspectives?
- Why have some adult Chinese- North Americans reacted so strongly against the author’s description of her parenting style when her daughters were in elementary school?
- Since both of the author’s children are not mature adults over age 24, it seems a bit early for the author to be reminiscing about her child rearing abilities. Even though the author showed drafts of the book chapters to her children for approval, how can her girls develop their own internal stories and understanding about the progress of their childhood when the whole world has already been told the story by the mother?
Photo (included in the WSJ article) from Ms. Chua’s album: “Mean me with Lulu in hotel room… with score taped to TV!”
According to the US Census Bureau, Asian Americans of East, South and South East Asia heritage have the highest educational attainment level and median household income of any ethnic group. They also make up less than 5% of the total population. Chinese Americans would be an even smaller sub category of this larger group. Here in British Columbia, and in the Lower Mainland in particular, there are numerous families who have Chinese and East Asian heritage. Undoubtedly the ideas presented in this book will be a hot topic of conversation amongst local parents of young and school-aged children.
Let’s talk about the issues and news that is having an impact on children and families in our community. We’d love to hear from you. Please feel free to use our comment function below, or leave a comment on our Facebook page
Ask any woman in her sixties or seventies and they will tell you that they used cloth diapers on their children. They also made their own baby food. A woman in her seventies or older will probably also tell you that she nursed her child and did not use formula. Ask a parent living in a remote area of the developing world and she will tell you that her child goes diaper free. You also won’t have to look too far in the developing world to find children who are strapped to their mother’s bodies using various cloth contraptions. There is nary a stroller in sight. In many households in the world mothers are not using baby food, copious amounts of diapers and harsh chemical-based cleaning products.
Why is it, then, that some older mothers feel the need to write about the so-called green parenting/attachment/Stay at Home Mom parenting interests of their younger female contemporaries? Why do we find articles online and in newspapers and magazines that poke fun at, and criticize, new mothers? Why do women who are ten, twenty or more years out of “young motherhood” feel the need to defend their own choices by painting the current interests and trends as unnecessary, trendy and over-the-top?
If a mother wants to cook a carrot on the stove and mash it rather than buy a jar of baby food for a dollar, why should other people care? If she wants to use a cloth diaper, rinse it and wash it, just as women in the 1960s and earlier did before Pampers were the norm, why should others wag their fingers and mock her household water consumption? If a mother wants to carry her child rather than push him around in a stroller for hours on end, is this so terrible? If she wants to nurse her child beyond six months, is this an unreasonable choice? If she wants to buy locally made clothes made out of natural fabrics, is she obsessed? If a mother wants to have her child sleep nearby just as babies have done in her ancestors’ families for generations, such we criticize her? If she decides to not work out of the home and be with her child/children is she wanting to be “ever present” for, and spending every moment with, her child? If a mother’s home has hardwood floors or tiles and she wants to make the effort to try the “diaper less during the day” trend, is this an unreasonable endeavour? Should we conclude that mothers making these decisions are victims who feel a loss of control in the face of challenges such as pollution in the environment?
Are parents today more “ insufferably obsessed then they’ve ever been“? Popular Vancouver Sun columnist Shelley Fralic thinks they are. She also thinks that back in the day – when her age group were raising young children – motherhood was a lot simpler. This is a generation of mothers who embraced breast feeding, unlike mothers in the 1960s who believed their doctors’ claims about the science behind formula. The La Leche movement and home birthing pools are not inventions of the 2000s. The children of Fralic’s generation were raised in an era when DINKs (double income with kids) were sending their little Johnny and Susies to every camp and class going. Baby boomer parents lavished all manner of praise and money on their children. Their children could do no wrong, and many were considered by their parents to be naturally gifted. Not surprisingly there was an increased interest in “programmes for gifted children” in schools. Many Canadians younger and older than the baby boomers will recall how parenting played out in the so-called “simpler” days of twenty odd years ago. Some of the offspring of the older Baby Boomers are now attending group counseling in college, sharing stories about how they were over-catered to and micro-managed by their parents. Meanwhile come colleges are holding workshops to help parents “let go” of their children. The results of the parenting styles of the Shelley Fralics of this world suggest that the criticisms older women levy on their younger counterparts are not based on rock solid parenting approaches.
A recent article by feminist and author Erica Jong suggests that mothers today are jumping on the green/attachment parenting band wagon due to a feeling of loss of control. If we are going to start attaching deeper, psychological meaning to simple actions such as making a pasta meal for a baby from scratch, perhaps we should investigate why the Erica Jongs of this world feel the need to analyze motherhood trends today. Perhaps they feel the need to defend their own decisions thirty years ago. They want to believe, and want the world to believe, that the work/life balance that they chose was the best possible choice for children then and now. Unfortunately they do so at the expense of other women.
You know a subset of mothers feel particularly entitled and overly self-assured when they feel the need to write about “scaring [a younger mother] one horror story at a time”, telling her that her viewpoint is “bullshit”. “I felt a sadistic rush of pleasure, the kind I imagine college seniors get when they’re bullying pledges during frosh week”, one such 40 something mother of teens wrote in a More Magazine (Canadian edition) opinion piece. “[The young mother to be] fled, I mean left, soon after, her face turned pale. Too bad — the rest of us were just starting to have a good time.”
Maybe if women of all generations were more consistent about banding together and supporting each other we would have the type of early childhood education and [day]care that women in countries such as Sweden enjoy. Maybe maternity and paternity leave provisions in the United States of America wouldn’t be so pitiful. The next time a new mother reads a critique of parenthood today – read motherhood – she should dare to push back. After all, if we are going to start labeling ideas as “bullshit”, let’s make sure we identify the right ones.
What do you think about this topic? Please leave a comment using the comment function below or by visiting our Facebook page. We would love to hear from you!
It’s no coincidence that Iceland has the most generous paternity-leave program in the modern world—three months!—and also, the smallest wage gap. These things go hand in hand. And no, it wasn’t a raging man-hating feminist who pushed the legislation through—it was a male prime minister, who recognized that Icelanders of both genders would benefit, and not just in the short term. The reasoning? As more men take time off to care for their children, the burden of parenthood no longer falls on women alone. Ultimately, employers will stop looking at young, fertile women and thinking, why bother investing? We’ll all be equally worthy of investment. (Who Needs Men? We Do., Newsweek)
They brought us Ikea, Volvo and Saab. Like the Icelandic people, the Swedes are famous for their progressive programme offerings in Early Childhood Education and care (day care), and have some of the world’s best educated ECE teachers. These provisions enable quality education and care for a future generation of Swedes, caring for the one to six year old, pre-elementary school aged child. These family-centred polices also allow women to return to the workforce and, as a consequence, support economic growth.
“Society is a mirror of the family. The only way to achieve equality in society is to achieve equality in the home. Getting fathers to share the parental leave is an essential part of that.” (Bengt Westerberg, Former Deputy Prime Minister of Sweden)
Since 1974, Sweden has also had a progressive paternity leave programme wherein mothers and fathers can take 14 months off (combined) at up to 80% of the pay, with a guarantee to be able to return to their previously held position. In 1995 the government introduced a non-transferable two months off for fathers which is forfeited should the father choose to not use it. Since the paternity leave programme started, the Swedish birth rate has increased. For American parents these details must seem like something from a utopian dream. Here in British Columbia fathers can take paternity leave; however, the pay rate is lower than 80% and fewer men take advantage of the paternity leave provisions. Parents in British Columbia can receive 100% of their pay rate if they work for an organization that provides a “top up” programme.
For British Columbians, more than the details of the paternity leave, the Swedish and Icelandic programmes are interesting for the validation they provide for men who want to stay home with their children in the early years. Indeed, as the programme states, it is a badge of honour to be at home with your children.
“Machos with dinosaur values don’t make the top-10 lists of attractive men in women’s magazines anymore. Now men can have it all — a successful career and being a responsible daddy. It’s a new kind of manly. It’s more wholesome.” (Birgitta Ohlsson, European affairs minister)
The following benefits are available to Swedish fathers:
- Parental benefit in connection with childbirth is provided for a total of 480 days per child.
- Sixty days are reserved for the father and 60 for the mother. The rest can be shared freely.
- 390 days are paid at 80 percent of the parent’s income, up to a given ceiling.
- The remaining 90 days are at a set daily rate.
- In addition, fathers are entitled to 10 days of paid leave when the child is born. About 80 percent of fathers take advantage of this benefit. (Sweden Fosters Fatherhood, Robin Hincks)
A study reported in the Guardian newspaper highlights the importance of fathers spending a sufficient amount of time with their children in the early years, in particular.
Children are more likely to suffer development problems if their fathers do not take paternity leave or spend enough time with them when they are very young, according to an analysis of thousands of babies born around the turn of the millennium.
A report published today by the Equal Opportunities Commission and based on research tracking 19,000 children born in 2000 and 2001 found emotional and behavioural problems were more common by the time youngsters reached the age of three if their fathers had not taken time off work when they were born, or had not used flexible working to have a more positive role in their upbringing.
What do you think about this topic? Please leave a comment using the comment function below or by visiting our Facebook page. We would love to hear from you!
Facebook
GooglePlus
LinkedIn
Twitter
RSS
